Title
People vs. Bugtong y Amoroso
Case
G.R. No. 220451
Decision Date
Feb 26, 2018
Accused acquitted due to lapses in chain of custody and non-compliance with RA 9165, compromising evidence integrity and raising reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 220451)

Factual Antecedents

The accused-appellant was charged following his alleged involvement in selling one small sachet of shabu to police officer SPO1 Ma. Nanette Puasan during a buy-bust operation, which was organized after initial surveillance activities indicated drug transactions at his residence. The prosecution argued that the transaction involved the exchange of marked money (P100 and P200 bills) for the sachet of shabu. The situation escalated with the arrest of the accused-appellant after the completion of the drug sale.

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution’s narrative included testimonies from multiple police officers who were part of the buy-bust operation. They described a detailed account of the events leading up to the arrest of the accused-appellant, the confiscation and identification of the narcotics, and the subsequent handling of the case within the police precinct and crime laboratory. SPO1 Puasan testified to the direct exchange of marked money for the sachet of shabu, which she later marked with “AB” for identification. The subsequent examination by the forensic chemist affirmed the substance was indeed shabu.

Version of the Defense

The accused-appellant's defense contended that he had been wrongfully arrested as he was merely walking to pick up his child when police officers allegedly assaulted him. He asserted that their actions constituted a forced arrest and that he had not sold any drugs. The defense raised concerns about the credibility of the police officers’ testimonies and the handling of the evidence.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

The RTC found the accused-appellant guilty, citing the testimony of the poseur buyer as credible, along with the proper handling of evidence that established the authenticity of the drug sale. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of P500,000. The RTC rejected the defense’s arguments, emphasizing the presumption of regularity in the performance of police duties.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA)

On appeal, the CA upheld the RTC's decision, agreeing that the prosecution successfully demonstrated that no break in the chain of custody compromised the integrity of the seized drug. The CA reiterated that the prosecution proved the essential elements of illegal sale, asserting sufficient evidence warranted the conviction.

Our Ruling

Upon review, the Supreme Court determined that both the RTC and CA overlooked critical aspects concerning the chain of custody of the seized drug. The Court asserted that the prosecution failed to solidify a continuous chain of custody, an essential requirement under Republic Act No. 9165, which governs the handling of seized drugs. Crucial gaps were identified, including the timing and manner of marking the seized item. The absence of immediate marking and discrepancies in witness testimonies raised substantial doubts regarding the integrity of the e

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.